🔗 Share this article

The Queensland government released confidential information about the mother of a trans teenager – data she claims potentially “outed” her teen – to a stranger.

Allegations of “Bullying” and “Invasion of Privacy”

The disclosure came as the state government was charged of “coercion” and “a breach of confidentiality” after demanding confidential medical information from parents of transgender children who are considering a further legal challenge to its disputed ban on hormone blockers.

Recent Official Order on Hormone Treatments

Recently, the Queensland health minister, Tim Nicholls, issued a new order banning the prescription of puberty blockers for trans individuals, just hours after the state’s supreme court determined the government’s first attempt was unlawful.

Guardian Australia has spoken to several parents who have approached Nicholls for a legal document called a statement of reasons – a formal explanation of why the government made a decision to prohibit puberty blockers in the region. By law, the paper must be provided under the legal statute.

Requested Medical Details

Each were required by the health authorities for particulars of their teen’s health background, including “your child’s name, their birthdate and any supporting documents which supports your child having a clinical diagnosis of gender identity disorder”.

The details were sought before the explanation would be provided.

The email, which has been reviewed by the media, also instructed them to verify if your child is a patient of the Queensland Children’s Gender Clinic so that we can verify the information provided with the health service,” states the email, which was sent recently.

Parents Describe Request as Invasion of Privacy

Each parent characterized the demand as an invasion of privacy.

A mother said she was reluctant to divulge the details because the state government had accidentally sent her data to a different parent.

“It seems like having to reveal your child to actually get a reply; like, it’s frightening,” she said.

Case of the Mother

Louise*, who cannot be legally identified because it would also reveal or expose her child, was among those who asked for a explanation on multiple occasions.

In May, the department emailed a reply intended for her to another parent, revealing her identity and location – and the fact that she had a transgender child – to a stranger. She said a department official later apologised over the phone; the Guardian has obtained an message from the agency confirming the error.

She said she felt “sick and unsafe” as a result of the blunder.

“My daughter is very reserved. She is immensely fearful of being outed in any public space. She doesn’t like anyone to be aware that she’s trans,” the mother said.

“I respect that to my core as much as humanly possible. The sole occasion I ever disclose is out of need for obtaining entry to supports and only to individuals I consider trustworthy and I know well.”

The parent was particularly concerned about the implication it would be “confirmed” by the hospital.

She said the request was “intimidating” and “seems coercive”.

Additional Mother Expresses Worries

Sally* said she was unwilling revealing the health background of her seven-year-old non-binary child.

“It’s not my information, it’s a child’s details,” she said.

“To imagine that that information could inadvertently be disclosed someday, in any way, you know, even if that was accidental, could be extremely upsetting to them.”

She responded saying the department had requested an “excessive level of detail”.

“I wouldn’t provide that data to any other organisation that requested it, particularly in the context of the current political climate,” she said.

“It’s such intensely private information. You would not reveal, for example, your medical condition to the government office, you know. You’d be hesitant and careful to submit any of that information to a group of officials, essentially.”

Advocacy Group Weighing Further Action

The advocacy organization, which represented the mother in her challenge, was considering a second lawsuit, it said recently.

The head, Ren Shike, said the ruling had affected about 500 Queensland children and their families and it was “important to efficiently facilitate the supply of reasons so that children and their guardians can comprehend the reasoning behind this decision, which has had such a severe effect on their medical care”.

Government Position on Ban

The government has consistently said the ban would remain in place until a examination into gender-affirming care had been completed.